Seriously? You're comparing a crash program for atomic weapons while we're
at war to this?
The article made the points very well I thought: giving an award to a
program $600,000,000 over budget and 8 years behind schedule is a bit much
to take, as is depending on politicians to advance science. Oh sure,
they'll advance *some* science, usually the ones with the best connected
lobbyists and bidders or with the best photo ops.
For-profit companies don't invest much in pure research any more; most
can't afford it, especially with the economy tanking and the US
manufacturing base shrinking. It's difficult to estimate how much a
project will cost when it's started from scratch with untested
technology. The NIF is an experimental facility for fusion research. If
it's successful, then energy companies will profit hugely from research
that they either can't afford, or are too short-sighted to fund.
The free market hardly exists for primary research; never did. Private
companies benefit from government investment and subsidies, and if we're
lucky, they'll pass that cost savings to their customers. You complain
about government "intervention" when many of your favorite products and
services are the result of government grants. One of the few private
labs doing primary research, Bell Labs [Alcatel-Lucent], ended all basic
science projects in 2008.
OK, let's end ALL corporate subsidies. What products and services will
benefit and which will suffer?
*************************************************************************
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ **
*************************************************************************
